TotalMinors v 1.1 Released - Page 4

UKRedsFan · 03-25-2003, 05:40 AM

Ok, been through all the figures and come up with something which gives teams realistic payrolls.

Took the total revenue (which includes gate receipts, mechandising, local and national TV revenue and all others).

Subtracted all other expenses except the payroll.

As these were the 2001 figures, I added 5% to the total to allow for inflation. The final figure is a rough estimate of what each team could spend on salaries in order to break even.

I then took from this figure $24.401m for National TV and put this on every team in the game, setting the contract for 200 years.

I then subtracted the likely attendance and merchandise revenues that the game will generate. This figure can then be entered as the Local TV figure, but it also includes extra merchandising, extra gate receipts and extra expenses that the game doesn't simulate.

So here is each team's break-even payroll (some adjusted because of new parks, success in 2002 etc) and the figure that can be entered in LOCAL TV to achieve this, in brackets, then market size. I put fan interest for the Reds up because of the new park, and for the Angels because they are defending champs. I expect it should go up for the Twins too?

Arizona - $70m ($3m) Small market
Atlanta - $100m* ($40m) Sl. Above av
Anaheim - $60m* ($1m) Good
Baltimore - $85m ($30m) Good
Boston - $127m ($52.5m) Really Big
Chicago Cubs - $87m ($31.5) Sl. Above av
Chicago Wt. Sox - $64m ($13m) bel. average
Cincinnati - $55m* ($5m) - small
Cleveland - $109m ($50m) - below av.
Colorado - $70m ($12.5m) - small
Detroit - $61m ($16m) - average
Florida - $27m (-$22m) - average
Houston - $74m ($18.5m) - bel average
Kansas - $29m (-$17m) - tiny
LA - $73.5 ($10m) - really big
Milwaukee - $66m ($14m) - tiny
Minnesota - $30m* (£-18m) - small
Montreal - $24m* ($-20m)- small
NY Mets - $108m ($53m) - huge
NY Yankees - $150m ($64m) - huge
Oakland - $39m ($-10m) - small
Philadelphia - $30m ($-21m) - Big
Pittsburgh - $52.5m ($2.5m) - Small
San Diego - $31.5m ($-21.5m) - Small
San Francisco - $95m ($28.5m) - average
Seattle - $124m ($53.5m) - good
St. Louis - $86m ($23m) - small
Tampa Bay - $37.5m ($-1.5m) - below average
Texas - $80m ($16.5m) - sl. above av
Toronto -$32.5m ($-13.5m) - average

*adjustments

Atlanta was $89m, but taken into account the hiding of certain revenues in AOL Time Warner's accounts, thought to total at least $10m.

Anaheim was $43m, but increased fan interest, play-off revenue and world series merchandise was the reason for increase.

Cincinnati was $35m, new park should generate a lot of extra gate receipts and other revenue that the old park could not.

Montreal came out as $-1m. The only way they could breakeven is by the players paying them $1m to play

Increased it to a arbitrary figure for maintaining an MLB squad.

Minnesota was $13m, but again increased fan interest, play-off revenue and other revenues should increase.

So, any suggestions? I haven't taken into account the wealth of the owners. This could affect some teams whose owners are willing to subsidise a loss in order to get a better team.

In real life Tampa Bay and Arizona have less National TV payments, $18m instead of $24m. But I don't know when this ends so I put $24m for both anyway.

I ran a sim and it worked out pretty well. There was still room for teams to run bigger payrolls as a result of good performance the year before. Some teams made huge losses, some made profits, but as the game will only let you spend $5m or so more than your breakeven payroll, this will even out after a few seasons.

The only problem was that players contracts were being extended but reduced significantly (some from $5-6m down to $500k). Obviously the game isn't set up to award MLB contracts, and also awards them based on ratings rather than performance or player greed.

UKRedsFan · 03-25-2003, 05:47 AM

I have to check the Minnesota Local figure, I think that is for a payroll of $33m not $30m.

Some teams have minus local tv figures because they are so poor at generating local revenue.

To work out your allowed payroll when playing the game, just add the Total Broadcast income for 2003 to the gate and merchandise income for 2002, and add $5m.

Matteo · 03-25-2003, 07:56 AM

Market Size seems a little off IMO.

Atlanta sl above average?
Houston below average?
Arizona small?
Baltimore good?

Market size IMO represent metropolitan population and economic power, not fan interest!

Erich Ingram · 03-25-2003, 08:21 AM

I would bump up Philly as well, there is a lot of hype due to the addition of their new players plus they will also be moving into a much better ball park next season as well.

NYJuggalo45 · 03-25-2003, 09:04 AM

couple of transactions...Jason Conti of TB got traded to Milwaukee for Javier Valentin and Livan Hernandez on SF got traded to Montreal for Jim Brewer I think it was.

UKRedsFan · 03-25-2003, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Matteo
Market Size seems a little off IMO.

Atlanta sl above average?
Houston below average?
Arizona small?
Baltimore good?

Market size IMO represent metropolitan population and economic power, not fan interest!

to be honest I don't know a lot about these, most of them are left from GForce's roster.

Market size is determined largely by how much money you can make from Local TV and merchandising sales and Arizona for example don't do that well here.

UKRedsFan · 03-25-2003, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rolen17
I would bump up Philly as well, there is a lot of hype due to the addition of their new players plus they will also be moving into a much better ball park next season as well.

yeah that should be considered, I only knew about the Red's new park, what other teams are moving soon?

the increase in revenue for a new park is estimated to be worth $15-25 per year to start with but this doesn't last long if you don't win games.

So Philly would be about $50m.

Unfortunately on OOTP it is difficult to "speculate to accumulate" and spend a lot more than you can afford in order to hopefully boost attendances, tv money and merchandising through improved performances.

For example, the Dodgers are currently running $30-35m over what they can afford, but are surely banking on making a World Series challenge and raking in the cash from winning games.

UKRedsFan · 03-25-2003, 11:53 AM

Benny Ayegbeni (sp) and Jacob Cruz were both on the Reds spring training team, now assigned to minors I think.

Kronos · 03-25-2003, 12:17 PM

Other then the Reds this year and the Phillies next year the Padres are also moveing into a new stadium next season, 'Petco Park'.
Other then those every other new stadium is still in the 'Talk about it/Who's paying for it/Wheres it going stage'.

GForce22 · 03-25-2003, 12:49 PM

http://home.nycap.rr.com/nickandaj/marketsize.html

that's the link I got the market info from. I just need to adjust how I broke them down. All input on this matter is appreciated. If I can straighten out all the financial stuff, this set will get even better!

GH

UKRedsFan · 03-25-2003, 01:11 PM

thinking about it you could bump up all the low-revenue (less than $40m?) teams maybe $5m as they will be expecting a cheque from revenue sharing.

UKRedsFan · 03-25-2003, 02:16 PM

here are some revised figures allowing for likely incomes from revenue sharing.

I don't think we need to penalise those teams who pay into the sharing fund because the game will take that money away anyway; it just doesn't put it in a place where small clubs can spend it on their payroll.

I made the threshold $55m, if the breakeven payroll is below that the team will receive from revenue sharing:

Florida $27m + $18m = $45m
Kansas $29m + $16m = $45m
Minnesota $30m + $14m = $44m
Montreal $-1m + $28.5m = $27.5m
Oakland $39m + $6m = $45m
Pittsburgh $52.5m + $1m = $53.5m
Toronto $32.5m + $9m = $42.5m
Tampa Bay $36m + $7m = $43m

Teams with new parks ($15m p/a increase in revenue)

Philadelphia $45m + $5m = $50m
San Diego $46.5m + $3.5m = $50m
Cincinnati $50m + $2.5m = $52.5m

UKRedsFan · 03-25-2003, 02:28 PM

new local tv figures after revenue sharing .

Florida: minus $4m
Kansas: minus $1m
Minnesota: minus $1m
Montreal: minus $16.5m
Oakland: minus $4m
Pittsburgh: + $3.5m
Toronto: minus $4.5m
Tampa Bay: + $4m (put Vaughns release fee against payroll this year)

Philadelphia: minus $1m
San Diego : minus $3.5m
Cincinnati: + $2.5m

In my game I will put Arizona's and Tampa's national TV fee down to $18m for two seasons.

GForce22 · 03-25-2003, 02:53 PM

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ne...212pappas.html

from after 2001, but this gives local revenue as of that year. I wonder what would happen if, since I did salaries at 70% of total, local media revenue was entered at 70% of the total in this article.

GH

ATypicalGiantsFan · 03-25-2003, 03:18 PM

Just a note. Many of the players have contracts with salaries below the game's min of $300,000. Not sure how the minimum salaries work in the majors, just thought I'd point that out.

GForce22 · 03-25-2003, 03:35 PM

yeah, figured you needed to reduce salaries across the board, so guys making the minimum are actually at 210,000 in the game. Haven't seen it cause a problem.

GH

UKRedsFan · 03-26-2003, 05:46 AM

I gather you want to keep salaries at 70% of real life then?

Using those local media figures won't work because it ignores other local revenue; the Yankees made $57m in local media and $47m in other local revenue. The gate receipts in the game are also way out because they're based on a $10 basic price, whereas an average Yankee ticket is something like $20-25, so the difference needs to be built into local TV revenue.

And you also need to take into account running costs other than the 40-man roster which is between $40-80m.

If you want I can do all my calculations again at 70% of the actual figures?

rasnell · 03-26-2003, 08:06 AM

Good job on your Reds' estimate with new park. Did you catch how low your previous version was for Ken Griffey's payroll? You may have adjusted that in 1.1 -- I haven't downloaded yet. Just FYI.

GForce22 · 03-26-2003, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by UKRedsFan
I gather you want to keep salaries at 70% of real life then?

Using those local media figures won't work because it ignores other local revenue; the Yankees made $57m in local media and $47m in other local revenue. The gate receipts in the game are also way out because they're based on a $10 basic price, whereas an average Yankee ticket is something like $20-25, so the difference needs to be built into local TV revenue.

And you also need to take into account running costs other than the 40-man roster which is between $40-80m.

If you want I can do all my calculations again at 70% of the actual figures?

Basically I really don't want to go through the salaries again. The developer of the game has said real salaries are a bad idea, so I stick with what the developer says. That being said, the 70% thing has worked pretty well.
What if you used the 70% media figure but we also boosted the ticket prices to 70% of the avg ticket price for that team? I can get that info pretty easily I think.
Put it this way...within reason, I'll do whatever I can to get the finances working in a remotely realistic fashion. If we can figure something out that works I'll be glad to implement it.

GH

GForce22 · 03-26-2003, 05:56 PM

Here are the average ticket prices for each team, and the 70% figure. I wonder what using these figures would do.

GH

Code:

TEAM	     AVG Ticket		70%
Anaheim Angels	          18.92		13.244
Arizona Diamondbacks	19.58		13.706
Atlanta Braves	          21.89		15.323
Baltimore Orioles	21.92		15.344
Boston Red Sox	          41.94		29.358
Chicago Cubs	          24.05		16.835
Chicago White sox	19.96		13.972
Cincinnati Reds	     16.65		11.655
Cleveland Indians**	22.68		15.876
Colorado Rockies**	16.47		11.529
Detroit Tigers***	23.05		16.135
Florida Marlins	     17.63		12.341
Houstan Astros	     23.42		16.394
Kansas City Royals	14.17		9.919
Los Angeles Dodgers	16.38		11.466
Milwauke Brewers	21.94		15.358
Minnesota Twins	     12.87		9.009
Montreal Expos^	      8.99		6.293
New York Mets^^	     28.94		20.258
New York Yankees	32.22		22.554
Oakland Athletics	17.44		12.208
Philadelphia Phillies	17.51		12.257
Pittsburgh Pirates^^	24.82		17.374
San Diego Padres	15.39		10.773
San Francisco Giants	27.39		19.173
Seattle Mariners	26.83		18.781
St. Louis Cardinals	24.23		16.961
Tempa Bay Devil Rays	18.14		12.698
Texas Rangers**	      23.1		16.17
Toronto Blue Jays^	19.2		13.44

03-25-2003, 07:56 AM	#63
Matteo Major Leagues Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL Posts: 473	Market Size seems a little off IMO. Atlanta sl above average? Houston below average? Arizona small? Baltimore good? Market size IMO represent metropolitan population and economic power, not fan interest! __________________ ESPN The Show live chat during 2004 ALCS: Julie (Boston): Do you think Jeter does the fist pump everytime he disappoints a woman in bed? Or does he save it for when he's with A-Rod? Bill Simmons: Whoops - I didn't mean to post that. Really, I didn't.

03-25-2003, 08:21 AM	#64
Erich Ingram Moderator Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 2,217	I would bump up Philly as well, there is a lot of hype due to the addition of their new players plus they will also be moving into a much better ball park next season as well. __________________ Erich Ingram (Rolen17) IOSBL San Diego Aztecs 2010, 2012,2013, 2014 World Series Champions Maelstrom Padres 2026 World Champions eMLB Washington Nationals

03-25-2003, 09:04 AM	#65
NYJuggalo45 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 2,045	couple of transactions...Jason Conti of TB got traded to Milwaukee for Javier Valentin and Livan Hernandez on SF got traded to Montreal for Jim Brewer I think it was. __________________ This space for rent

03-25-2003, 03:18 PM	#75
ATypicalGiantsFan Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 105	Just a note. Many of the players have contracts with salaries below the game's min of $300,000. Not sure how the minimum salaries work in the majors, just thought I'd point that out. __________________ According to the Chicago Tribune, the following statistic was given in the press notes for a Chicago-Oakland game: The Oakland Athletics are 32-0 in games in which they have scored more runs than their opponents. Phil Rizzuto - "Hey Yogi I think we're lost." - Yogi Berra - "Ya, but we're making great time!" "I knew I was going to take the wrong train, so I left early."-Berra

03-26-2003, 08:06 AM	#78
rasnell Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Frankfort, Kentucky Posts: 3,746	Good job on your Reds' estimate with new park. Did you catch how low your previous version was for Ken Griffey's payroll? You may have adjusted that in 1.1 -- I haven't downloaded yet. Just FYI. __________________ Charlie Root won more games for the Cubs than any pitcher (201), yet was remembered for one pitch to Babe Ruth. Find out more about the 1929 World Series in my book, "Root for the Cubs: Charlie Root and the 1929 Chicago Cubs." See the web site at www.rootforthecubs.com. The book is at http://www.amazon.com/Root-Cubs-Char...t+for+the+cubs. Beta tester, OOTP 2007-2023 and iOOTP 2011-2014.

03-25-2003, 05:40 AM	#61
UKRedsFan Minors (Single A) Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Worthing, England Posts: 83	Ok, been through all the figures and come up with something which gives teams realistic payrolls. Took the total revenue (which includes gate receipts, mechandising, local and national TV revenue and all others). Subtracted all other expenses except the payroll. As these were the 2001 figures, I added 5% to the total to allow for inflation. The final figure is a rough estimate of what each team could spend on salaries in order to break even. I then took from this figure $24.401m for National TV and put this on every team in the game, setting the contract for 200 years. I then subtracted the likely attendance and merchandise revenues that the game will generate. This figure can then be entered as the Local TV figure, but it also includes extra merchandising, extra gate receipts and extra expenses that the game doesn't simulate. So here is each team's break-even payroll (some adjusted because of new parks, success in 2002 etc) and the figure that can be entered in LOCAL TV to achieve this, in brackets, then market size. I put fan interest for the Reds up because of the new park, and for the Angels because they are defending champs. I expect it should go up for the Twins too? Arizona - $70m ($3m) Small market Atlanta - $100m* ($40m) Sl. Above av Anaheim - $60m* ($1m) Good Baltimore - $85m ($30m) Good Boston - $127m ($52.5m) Really Big Chicago Cubs - $87m ($31.5) Sl. Above av Chicago Wt. Sox - $64m ($13m) bel. average Cincinnati - $55m* ($5m) - small Cleveland - $109m ($50m) - below av. Colorado - $70m ($12.5m) - small Detroit - $61m ($16m) - average Florida - $27m (-$22m) - average Houston - $74m ($18.5m) - bel average Kansas - $29m (-$17m) - tiny LA - $73.5 ($10m) - really big Milwaukee - $66m ($14m) - tiny Minnesota - $30m* (£-18m) - small Montreal - $24m* ($-20m)- small NY Mets - $108m ($53m) - huge NY Yankees - $150m ($64m) - huge Oakland - $39m ($-10m) - small Philadelphia - $30m ($-21m) - Big Pittsburgh - $52.5m ($2.5m) - Small San Diego - $31.5m ($-21.5m) - Small San Francisco - $95m ($28.5m) - average Seattle - $124m ($53.5m) - good St. Louis - $86m ($23m) - small Tampa Bay - $37.5m ($-1.5m) - below average Texas - $80m ($16.5m) - sl. above av Toronto -$32.5m ($-13.5m) - average *adjustments Atlanta was $89m, but taken into account the hiding of certain revenues in AOL Time Warner's accounts, thought to total at least $10m. Anaheim was $43m, but increased fan interest, play-off revenue and world series merchandise was the reason for increase. Cincinnati was $35m, new park should generate a lot of extra gate receipts and other revenue that the old park could not. Montreal came out as $-1m. The only way they could breakeven is by the players paying them $1m to play Increased it to a arbitrary figure for maintaining an MLB squad. Minnesota was $13m, but again increased fan interest, play-off revenue and other revenues should increase. So, any suggestions? I haven't taken into account the wealth of the owners. This could affect some teams whose owners are willing to subsidise a loss in order to get a better team. In real life Tampa Bay and Arizona have less National TV payments, $18m instead of $24m. But I don't know when this ends so I put $24m for both anyway. I ran a sim and it worked out pretty well. There was still room for teams to run bigger payrolls as a result of good performance the year before. Some teams made huge losses, some made profits, but as the game will only let you spend $5m or so more than your breakeven payroll, this will even out after a few seasons. The only problem was that players contracts were being extended but reduced significantly (some from $5-6m down to $500k). Obviously the game isn't set up to award MLB contracts, and also awards them based on ratings rather than performance or player greed.

03-25-2003, 05:47 AM	#62
UKRedsFan Minors (Single A) Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Worthing, England Posts: 83	I have to check the Minnesota Local figure, I think that is for a payroll of $33m not $30m. Some teams have minus local tv figures because they are so poor at generating local revenue. To work out your allowed payroll when playing the game, just add the Total Broadcast income for 2003 to the gate and merchandise income for 2002, and add $5m.

03-25-2003, 11:53 AM	#68
UKRedsFan Minors (Single A) Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Worthing, England Posts: 83	Benny Ayegbeni (sp) and Jacob Cruz were both on the Reds spring training team, now assigned to minors I think.

03-25-2003, 12:17 PM	#69
Kronos Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Northern Ky. Posts: 318	Other then the Reds this year and the Phillies next year the Padres are also moveing into a new stadium next season, 'Petco Park'. Other then those every other new stadium is still in the 'Talk about it/Who's paying for it/Wheres it going stage'.

03-25-2003, 12:49 PM	#70
GForce22 Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 2,654	http://home.nycap.rr.com/nickandaj/marketsize.html that's the link I got the market info from. I just need to adjust how I broke them down. All input on this matter is appreciated. If I can straighten out all the financial stuff, this set will get even better! GH

03-25-2003, 01:11 PM	#71
UKRedsFan Minors (Single A) Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Worthing, England Posts: 83	thinking about it you could bump up all the low-revenue (less than $40m?) teams maybe $5m as they will be expecting a cheque from revenue sharing.

03-25-2003, 02:16 PM	#72
UKRedsFan Minors (Single A) Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Worthing, England Posts: 83	here are some revised figures allowing for likely incomes from revenue sharing. I don't think we need to penalise those teams who pay into the sharing fund because the game will take that money away anyway; it just doesn't put it in a place where small clubs can spend it on their payroll. I made the threshold $55m, if the breakeven payroll is below that the team will receive from revenue sharing: Florida $27m + $18m = $45m Kansas $29m + $16m = $45m Minnesota $30m + $14m = $44m Montreal $-1m + $28.5m = $27.5m Oakland $39m + $6m = $45m Pittsburgh $52.5m + $1m = $53.5m Toronto $32.5m + $9m = $42.5m Tampa Bay $36m + $7m = $43m Teams with new parks ($15m p/a increase in revenue) Philadelphia $45m + $5m = $50m San Diego $46.5m + $3.5m = $50m Cincinnati $50m + $2.5m = $52.5m

03-25-2003, 02:28 PM	#73
UKRedsFan Minors (Single A) Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Worthing, England Posts: 83	new local tv figures after revenue sharing . Florida: minus $4m Kansas: minus $1m Minnesota: minus $1m Montreal: minus $16.5m Oakland: minus $4m Pittsburgh: + $3.5m Toronto: minus $4.5m Tampa Bay: + $4m (put Vaughns release fee against payroll this year) Philadelphia: minus $1m San Diego : minus $3.5m Cincinnati: + $2.5m In my game I will put Arizona's and Tampa's national TV fee down to $18m for two seasons.

03-25-2003, 02:53 PM	#74
GForce22 Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 2,654	http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ne...212pappas.html from after 2001, but this gives local revenue as of that year. I wonder what would happen if, since I did salaries at 70% of total, local media revenue was entered at 70% of the total in this article. GH

03-25-2003, 03:35 PM	#76
GForce22 Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 2,654	yeah, figured you needed to reduce salaries across the board, so guys making the minimum are actually at 210,000 in the game. Haven't seen it cause a problem. GH

03-26-2003, 05:46 AM	#77
UKRedsFan Minors (Single A) Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Worthing, England Posts: 83	I gather you want to keep salaries at 70% of real life then? Using those local media figures won't work because it ignores other local revenue; the Yankees made $57m in local media and $47m in other local revenue. The gate receipts in the game are also way out because they're based on a $10 basic price, whereas an average Yankee ticket is something like $20-25, so the difference needs to be built into local TV revenue. And you also need to take into account running costs other than the 40-man roster which is between $40-80m. If you want I can do all my calculations again at 70% of the actual figures?